The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.

From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."

?php
>

Monday, May 30, 2016

Islamic Discrimination Against Women - Michael Curtis

by Michael Curtis

The British
government is to launch a full official independent review of the
application of Islamic sharia law in England and Wales, and of the role
of Sharia courts and Muslim arbitration tribunals.

If
a thing goes without saying it goes even better if it is said. It has
long been clear that Islamic Sharia law was incompatible with
conventions on human rights regarding the place of women in the legal
order and in all spheres of private and public life. Indeed, the
European Court of Human Rights in a decision of July 31, 2001 that the
“institution of Sharia law and a theocratic regime were incompatible
with the requirements of a democratic society.”

Everyone
genuinely concerned about the issue of gender equality and the
fundamental rights of women will be pleased with the announcement by
Theresa May, British Home Secretary, on May 25, 2016, that the British
government is to launch a full official independent review of the
application of Islamic sharia law in England and Wales, and of the role
of Sharia courts and Muslim arbitration tribunals.

May
is concerned that women have been victims of discriminatory decisions
taken by Sharia courts. The review will focus on a number of issues,
primarily the treatment of women in divorce, domestic violence, and
custody cases. It will not be a review of the whole of Sharia law, which
is the basis of guidance for Muslims who stay true to their religion.

In
Britain today there are thought to be 85 Sharia courts or councils
which rule in family and inheritance disputes between Muslims who agree
to be bound by the decisions. Sharia law is based on the Koran, and the
rulings since the 7th century by fatwas of Islamic scholars. Many of
those rulings are concerned with prayers, fasting, donations to the
poor, and the nature and degree of punishment, whether cutting off hands
or death of women by stoning for adultery, for offenders. The most
controversial concern the ill treatment of and the discrimination
against women.

The
review ordered by Secretary May is to be carried out by a panel chaired
by Professor Mona Siddiqui, Professor of Islamic and Interreligious
Studies at the University of Edinburgh, a specialist in Islamic law, and
will include family law experts and a retired High Court judge, and
advised by two Imans said to be religious and theological experts.

The
essential basis of the review is to assess if Sharia law has been and
is being misused or exploited in a way incompatible with British law and
is discriminating against certain groups especially women, and if it is
causing harm in communities. The Home Office of the British government
asserted there was evidence that some Sharia courts and councils were
acting in a “discriminatory and unacceptable way.” In particular,
British officials were concerned with the courts legitimized forced
marriages and issuing divorce settlements that were unfair to
women. This contradicts British law, as well as international law, which
provides rights and security for all citizens.

Secretary
May had already in March 2015 spoken of Muslim women being left
penniless after they were “divorced.” Worse, they were forced to remain
in abusive relationships because Sharia councils had decided that an
Islamic husband has a right to chastise his wife. Part of the problem is
that Muslim women may be unaware of their rights to leave violent
husbands.

Many of the difficulties facing Muslim women were discussed in a book Choosing Sharia?
by Dutch scholar Machteld Zee, who gained unprecedented access to and
attended hours of divorce hearings and marital disputes at London’s
Sharia Council and the Birmingham Central Mosque Sharia. Her detailed
analysis of seven cases is disturbing with their evidence of
overwhelming discrimination against women.

Zee
concluded that judges were not mean, they were acting on the basis of
Islam, that women are dependent on husbands and clerics. Her conclusion
was that Islamic women are in a situation of “marital captivity,” and
are not protected from domestic violence. Men are dominant in the
relationship and benefit from Sharia court decisions and from the strong
cultural pressures and the tight knit Islamic communities that uphold
masculine superiority, and which condone violence against women.

The
wider issue is the compatibility of Sharia court decisions with British
law, values, policies, and principles. On one hand, a Sharia judge has
asserted that divorces granted in British courts are worthless to
Muslims. More to the point, the ECHR in 2001 said that Sharia law is
incompatible with liberal democracy.

What
is most important is that the Muslim leaders are not addressing the
rights of women. It hardly need a full inquiry to ascertain that it is
illegal for any arbitration tribunal, especially Sharia courts, to act
in a manner that constitutes discrimination, harassment, or
victimization on the grounds of sex.

Nevertheless,
it is therefore welcoming that in addition to the new review of
Secretary May, that a bill has been proposed in March 2016 by Baroness
Cox in the British House of Lords making it illegal for an
administrative tribunal to do anything that constitutes such
discrimination. If passed, the bill would ensure that Sharia courts
issue rulings that are compatible with the British Equality. Women’s
rights groups must make sure that they do.